Do I pull the trigger (so to speak) on this setup?

asteffes

Explorer
Ok, folks, I'm thinking it's time to really prep the Tacoma. I'll probably want to get some new tires come this winter, and I've found it may be a good time to do a slew of things. I have a 2006 Tacoma double cab/short bed/V6 truck with SnugTop shell. Here's what I'm day dreaming of:

SwayAway RaceRunner front 2.5" coilovers
SwayAway RaceRunner rear shocks
Rear add-a-leaf or an 11-leaf Deaver pack if the ride will be substantially better (I want to retain load carrying and towing capacity.)
BFG AllTerrains or Bridgestone Revos in 285-75-16 (wider than is popular here, but I would like improved on-road stability.)

Should I also install the Camburg UCAs? Are they going to be necessary to clear the 285s?
 

crawler#976

Expedition Leader
With SAW's front and rear, you'll be able to do some serious :truck: 'n!!!

From the limited research I've done on our '05, UCA are pretty much a must for that lift and tire combo. Without them, the front geometery is jacked up.

I'd prolly opt for the Deavers over an add-a-leaf if $$$ is no concern. Ride quality will be much better.


Sounds like an awesome plan!
 

asteffes

Explorer
I don't want to do an extremely high lift... just enough to compensate for an ARB bumper. Probably around 1.5-2"
 
Last edited:

Life_in_4Lo

Explorer
for a 2.5"-3" lift, uniball uca's are not necessary.

I hear the donahoe coilovers are better than saws... I know a few guys running Hoes and really like them.

Not sure of clearance issues w/ 285's- might get some rubbing at the mudflap area. I *think* you will be ok w/ clearance at the stock uca. If you go aftermarket wheels (0-offset) it will clear fine for sure.
 

Dave Bennett

Adventurist
Do It!!!

I say go for it.
I also think if you do 285's that UCA's are not optional, you will want them later if you dont do them now, my personal experience as I would have saved $ having the while front done at once... And you will NEED new rims with different backspacing to clear them. Some guys have even hacked the front cab mount up for clearancing 285's... I would consider another tire size as these are not the best choice for this truck if you wheel it IMO.

For the rear, Deaver's are awesome. I have 12 leaves and it is a little stiff when empty, but I got them for travelling with my gear so 12 is actually perfect. I dont know the numbers offhand on the 12's but I'm sure 11 would be good - just dont do the 10's because alot of guys say theyre too soft on a new Tacoma

I dont know what your price on the SAW stuff is but Demello does have a nice package deal on the Donahoe/deaver setup.

Ultimately, a man does what he wants so have fun with it!
 
Last edited:

crawler#976

Expedition Leader
asteffes said:
I don't want to do an extremely high lift... just enough to compensate for an ARB bumper. Probably around 1.5-2"

With that size tire you'll need to get at least 2" of suspention lift, and a 1" body lift.
 

asteffes

Explorer
Maybe I got carried away. I talked with UncleChris and he suggests that coilovers and upgraded rear shocks may be all I need to accomodate an ARB bumper, winch and 265-75-16 tires (which are all I really need... Don't know what I was thinking about the 285s...)

I sent an email off to Wheeler's inquiring about the RaceRunner rear shocks' ability to run at or close to stock ride height without bottoming out. Maybe BajaTaco has some thoughts on this? :)
 

Scott Brady

Founder
I would use caution with RaceRunner. Their quality has been suspect in the last year or so.

The rear 05 suspension is actually pretty good. I have been impressed with Randy's 06 loaded with water, gear and a roof tent.

My recommendation would be to install the bumper and see how things work. Then spend the $$$ if required.
 

Willman

Active member
Life_in_4Lo said:
I hear the donahoe coilovers are better than saws... I know a few guys running Hoes and really like them.

:iagree:

If you are going to be spending the big money on coilovers anyways....I would go for the Donahoes all the way for the front!!! The rest of your plan sounds good!!! You must have a lot of weight you are tugging along for an 11 pack!!! Sounds good my friend!!!

This is my two cents!!!

:costumed-smiley-007
 

asteffes

Explorer
I mentioned the 11-leaf pack because Deaver says their 10-leaf setup reduces the overall cargo capacity of the truck. They made the spring rate lower to facilitate better articulation but the side effect is they don't support as much weight.

I think an AAL would be fine if I even need a rear lift at all. If I stick with a reasonable tire, like the 265-75-16, I wouldn't need any lift at all in the rear and the front would only need to be raised enough to compensate for the ARB/winch combination.
 

Willman

Active member
asteffes said:
I mentioned the 11-leaf pack because Deaver says their 10-leaf setup reduces the overall cargo capacity of the truck. They made the spring rate lower to facilitate better articulation but the side effect is they don't support as much weight.

Never heard that! Thanks for sharing!!
 

BajaTaco

Swashbuckler
OK, you asked for it...

I tend to agree with Scott in that it would be a good idea to get the bumper and winch on, and load up the truck as if for a trip, and see where everything sits, and how it rides. My guess is that you will indeed want to upgrade the suspension, but if you can afford the in-between time to use this "wait and see" method, it might help you make the right choice on what to get. Having said that, I know most of the time that people can't afford the time to do that. If you have trips planned and want to be done with it, it's much easier just to make a calculated estimate, get all of the parts and have a wrench-fest. Nothing wrong with that.

Regarding Sway-A-Way, here is my .02...

I was SUPER happy with the 2.0 front coilovers I used to have. I got a ton of use out of them and the performance was excellent. I did a rebuild on them at one time, and went through a pair of coils and eventually a set of bushings. But they did their job, and when the parts wore out from lots of service, they were rebuildable. They have since been rebuilt again and are now happily serving on crawler#976's tacoma. (and I miss them!) Since the 2.0's I have gone to the 2.5's and the results have been mixed. The damping performance is great, and they sure do look nice. BUT, the original coil springs that came with them were defective and it took quite a while to get replacements that were correct. Apparently they had a bad batch of coils get assembled on some of their product (this was a year ago and has since been resolved). I am also getting an odd clunking noise from the truck when doing rough trails and the suspension is fully cycling. It appears to be the worst on uphills when the front of the truck is unloaded and the arms allowed to droop more. I can't say for sure that it is the coilovers, but they are suspect until I have some time to get the truck up in the air and do some inspecting. I plan to replace the SAWs with the stock struts and see if I still get the clunking symptom. One other issue I have had is that the adjusting collars were very difficult to turn, even when lubed. The spanner wrench broke, and by the time I had repeatedly adjusted the preload on that first set of defective coils, the collars were toast. The material seemed to be a litte on the soft side, and the tool holes just splayed out. Maybe the plating tolerances, either on the shock can, or on the collars, were just a little thick or something, I don't know. The resistance seemed to come and go as the collar was rotated to various positions on the threads. I had to get them to send me replacement collars when I put the new coils on. The new collars seem to be working okay.

This next issue is just something to keep in mind, and isn't specific to SAW, but can happen with Donahoes also. It just depends on the truck and is more related to the off-chance that the front geometry is just slightly off, as the tolerances for this condition are so close as to make it possible with some trucks and not with others. What happens is that the bottom coil seat (because it is so big to accomodate the larger coil diameter) will contact the banjo-bolt brake fittings under full-droop, full steering lock. This possibility is mentioned in the installation literature. It requires some clearancing of the banjo bolt fitting, either by replacing with an aftermarket piece, or using a rubber mallet to slightly bend the fitting. I'm not certain if this is a condition of the newer Tacomas or not, but my guess is that it might be. It's just something to be aware of. And it is something you don't have to deal with if using the 2.0's :) IMO, unless you run the truck really fast and hard for extended mileage, you could save some cash by going with the 2.0's and get just as good of performance. The 2.5's are nice for the extra oil capacity, but I think the 2.0's work just as well. Pay attention to the spring rate for whatever coilover you go with, and don't be afraid to call the mfg. or dealer and ask them to make sure the spring rate is a good match for the final GVW for the front half of your truck. You could always request a different rate if the off-the-shelf doesn't quite jive with your application.

OK, now for the rear shocks...

My Sway-A-Way 2.5" reservoir shocks are incredible. I had them valved specifically for my truck, and they perform very well. You mentioned using SAW for the rear of your truck, but I don't think they make a unit that bolt onto the stock mounts. If you can afford the extra time/money to have some mounts welded to accept the larger/longer shocks, I highly recommend it, especially for these heavy expedition-style trucks we see around here. Smaller shocks will work okay too, but they usually are not rebuildable and will wear out faster, and need to be replaced more often.

I would do a little snooping around on the forums and see if there is any recent feedback on the SAW 2.5 coilovers. I would also send out some emails/PM's to ask people what their recent experience is with them.

As for your leaf springs, I would spend the money to do a full-replacement set tailored exactly to your final GVW requirments.
 

BajaTaco

Swashbuckler
Oh yea - the tires. If I had an 05-06 Tacoma, I would go with the 255/85/16 like 05TACODOC has on his truck. I think proportionally, the taller tires look a lot better on the newer Tacoma bodies - bigger truck, bigger tire. Re-gearing and fuel economy is a pain in the butt though. The added clearance and off-roadability would be nice to have too. This is even more of a consideration if you add an ARB bumper. Speaking from experience (using ARB with 32" tires), I can say you will want to get the bottom of that bumper (especially the corners) as high off the ground as you can, within reason, if you plan to do fairly technical trails where approach angle is critical.

I think the extra width of the newer Tacomas more than compensates for any loss of road stability that you might experience due to a narrow profile tire. You are absolutely correct that the 265's are probably all you need. They will cost less, gearing won't be adversely affected, and you will have better COG. I guess we'll find out what you decide on :)
 

asteffes

Explorer
Thank you, Chris, for that helpful response. Those issues with the 2.5" RaceRunner coilovers are interesting. It seems that everyone is singing praises for the Donahoe Racing 2.5" coilovers and, being one to be skeptical about what "everyone else" is doing, I had to ask about the RaceRunner hardware.

There are some points to consider about both setups in terms of installation complexity, too. The Donahoe kit includes a swaybar bracket relocation piece to make room for the 2.5" shock body. The RaceRunner 2.5" kit just includes an entirely new swaybar. Your explanation and the info I can find on the web says the 2.0" RaceRunner kit requires nothing other than bolting in the new coilovers - nothing extra to go wrong, no extra parts to break, etc. I really like the simplicity and - I would hope - increased reliability of the 2.0" RaceRunner kit. They're also $240 less expensive than the 2.5" model, which goes a long ways to paying for the rear shocks.

As far as rear shocks, the DRes are a remote reservoir while the RR shocks are single-body. No hoses to break, no extra brackets to fall off, etc. Very elegant. Only question is if the RaceRunner rear shocks can run at stock ride height, which the slightly unclear response I received from the shop seems to confirm they can. I will have to get clarification, though.

So, I think if I can confirm that the RaceRunner 2" coilovers and rear shocks for the '05+ Tacos are solid, I'll go with them. Otherwise I may need to spring for the DRs. Thoughts?
 

Dave Bennett

Adventurist
Your truck (and mine) are heavy. IMO you need 2.5's up front and 11 or 12 leaves in the back. The 2.0 stuff is great on the smaller Tacomas but think about it, you have a doublecab 06 with ARB bumper and a shell and you plan on using this truck for what it was made for...
I would go with the heavier duty suspension stuff if I were you, it will last you longer and hold up that weight better.

Like Deaver is for leaves, Donahoe is arguably the gold standard for CO's.

Just my .02,
...Doc
 

Forum statistics

Threads
185,911
Messages
2,879,536
Members
225,497
Latest member
WonaWarrior
Top